tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post150465151938593828..comments2023-09-25T22:26:25.692+10:00Comments on mnml ssgs: Detroit: Myth Hating, Myth Creating [Part III of III] {Detroit Techno City}chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17030219185948353658noreply@blogger.comBlogger56125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-83835601706670348122008-07-13T05:27:00.000+10:002008-07-13T05:27:00.000+10:00of course history is what happened, but DOCUMENTIN...of course history is what happened, but DOCUMENTING history involves your own take to some extent. everyone takes what information they find relevant, and leave some behind. history itself is set in stone, but every record of every event since the dawn of time has varying facts, depending on who wrote it. that's because in the end, each is written by an individual or group of people with their own knowledge, experiences, and biases woven in, consciously or not. i'm just saying you can't take any one "history" as fact. just like you can't this one either. but i don't think that was ever his intention.<BR/><BR/>and really, unless you or i were there to actually see what happened at any given time, any account, whether it calls itself historical or not, is merely hearsay. even in the case of the most widely-accepted "history," there will always be some who disagree, which means no specific one can ever be fully correct or universal. on top of that, if you look up the definition of "history," it doesn't say anything about a history being the end-all account... it is merely a chronicle, narrative, or account of past events. so your account, mine, or someone else's can easily be a bit different. personally i wasn't there for all the things talked about in the series, so i wouldn't know. but unless someone else was there living every minute, i don't think they can either. haha at the end of the day, it's an article in a blog. take it or leave it. :)Cast Out.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02650315451428729343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-87338114964111249202008-07-09T23:16:00.000+10:002008-07-09T23:16:00.000+10:00"it's your take on a part of history."but history ..."it's your take on a part of history."<BR/><BR/>but history is not a matter of opinion, history is what actually happened. coming up with a different version of events that sounds more interesting or suits your current tastes better has nothing to do with history, it's story-telling, fiction, big difference.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-70678233348361265952008-07-09T09:36:00.000+10:002008-07-09T09:36:00.000+10:00for my own two cents, i liked this series. went ov...for my own two cents, i liked this series. went over some stuff i knew, enlightened me on some i didn't, and made me think about a few in new ways. i fail to see what some people got so worked up over about it. at the end of the day, it's your take on a part of history. every bit of history in every medium throughout the world is different, even the supposed "authoritative" ones. you take and learn what you can from each. well i don't feel like dragging myself into that whole thing, but nice work. keep it up.<BR/><BR/>b]Cast Out.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02650315451428729343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-5395053737566111662008-06-30T13:23:00.000+10:002008-06-30T13:23:00.000+10:00Am probably talking to the walls now, but anyhow.....Am probably talking to the walls now, but anyhow...<BR/><BR/><I>what if I don't frame techno as 'dance music' but as 'electronic music'?</I><BR/><BR/>I know you know better than this - 'electronic music' in 2008 means virtually everything except hoary old guitar bands and scene/emo nonsense. If 'electronic-ness' is the key factor Timbaland id more techno than Moodymann because he uses less samples...<BR/><BR/><I>geeks swapping desireable files in order to generate sociability and vying for prestige and legitimacy</I><BR/><BR/>Seriously, if musical experience has devolved to the level that its only purpose is to facilitate forum dick-measuring, why bother? I would genuinely rather play Warcraft! <BR/><BR/>I'd still hang on to the idea that there is something special and essential about the club experience that makes 'techno' what it is. It's that juxtaposition of the sweatiest, most human elements with something somewhat cold and mechanical that makes it tick.Jacobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16703651393173900609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-91121441553247173162008-06-26T23:45:00.000+10:002008-06-26T23:45:00.000+10:00All interesting points, for real....so what if I d...All interesting points, for real.<BR/><BR/>...so what if I don't frame techno as 'dance music' but as 'electronic music'? Do I recover my right to comment as a legitimate user of the music?<BR/><BR/>The common factor in all of this is 'electronics'. If you remove that, it's not electronic music. The dancing is only one possible headspace. <BR/><BR/>The dance moves I pull look like walking - because I'm listening to a techno mix while walking through the city. What could be healthier than that?<BR/><BR/>Meanwhile, there's a lot of morbidity to many of the club scenes. Yes, there are lots of different kinds of spaces, but they're increasingly securitised (in Melbourne at least). <BR/><BR/>If you don't mind my playing doctor, I would diagnose private listening as being in rude health; clubbing has a facelift, and is addicted to ice and snow.<BR/><BR/>Meanwhile, electronic music is constitutively mediated by electronics, and increasingly this means we're just swapping files made on Ableton and recoded as mp3s. If you ignore what the content is and look at the materials, what people are actually doing, there is very little difference between electronic music and a massive multiplayer game like Warcrack. Just different codes, and geeks swapping desireable files in order to generate sociability and vying for prestige and legitimacy. <BR/><BR/>...but maybe I need to lighten up and just go dancing. I hope the bouncer lets me in.PChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11828854682227101864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-39382971558267346672008-06-26T20:53:00.000+10:002008-06-26T20:53:00.000+10:00I'd also say that techno is very commonly made by ...<I>I'd also say that techno is very commonly made by a geeks who prefers staying at home in their studios to socialising with 'people'</I><BR/><BR/>I think this is very interesting. I'm wary of theories about 'what's wrong with music today' but I do think this isn't healthy. Dance music needs to have a strong connection to the dancefloor - to make (and indeed comment on) dance music well I think you have to love dancing and to do it fairly often.<BR/><BR/>New sounds often seem to emerge from that feedback loop of producers and DJs seeing what crowds respond to and then catering to that and evolving new sounds in the process. And there's a certain immediacy and intuitiveness about tracks that come from this process, to my ears. Think of Ron Hardy edits or early drum and bass and you've got that real sense that the musicians were building on what they'd seen happen on the dancefloor the week before, or indeed the way Larry Levan reportedly spent years tweaking 'Don't make me wait' to get it just right, trying out each new iteration at the garage to see how it worked on the floor.<BR/><BR/>I think there's a reference to this in the 'part 4' piece talking about the way that the detroit scene has changed from one in which people regularly played to a hometown crowd versus where it is now which I'm guessing is much more 'export-oriented'...<BR/><BR/>As to the point about clubs being exclusionary I'd say, some clubs are, but if you look at clubs in totality I think there's pretty much a place for everyone. Straight people may be excluded from gay clubs and vice versa but both do exist and have a place they can go. And new things spring up all the time. Look at the way rave clubs in UK in the 80s were reacting against dress codes versus the way Boombox could be categorised as a reaction against the prevailing LACK of dress codes in the 2000s London.<BR/><BR/>The sex point to me is a big one. As Sherburne points out a lot of 90s techno was a deliberate reaction against sex in music, but we've now got this weird situation where techno is sexless and hip-hop is heavily sexualised. House is a more mixed bag, obviously, but there does seem to be this subconscious idea in a lot of critics' heads that 'serious' dance music shouldn't be sexy which is really bullshit. <BR/><BR/>One of the things I love about golden age detroit is the way that some of those tracks make machines feel sexy - Blake Baxter and K Alexi are the most obvious examples. As contrasted with ghettotech which is sexual but not sexy (subjectivity alert). But yes I think you're right because there is a sexual undercurrent in some of the current berghain stuff but it's a kind of meth-ed up impersonal sexuality (which is fine, no criticism of that and it makes for an interesting aesthetic). Versus London Funky House which is a much wetter, messier more teenage sexiness and much more overt about it too...<BR/><BR/>But coming back to detroit - the best in detroit techno has all of the above - the intimate connection between musician and dancer, the sex and the tension with the lack of sex. But then so does the best in d&b or 2step or italo (and I'd argue, maybe funky house has this right now too).Jacobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16703651393173900609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-4542556756558944502008-06-26T15:33:00.000+10:002008-06-26T15:33:00.000+10:00@ Jacob: very interesting points and well taken, b...@ Jacob: very interesting points and well taken, but "There aren't rules and it's not okay to tell people that they musn't dress up the way they want to or that they musn't be from a certain place or that they have to interpret the music the way you tell them to."<BR/><BR/>Dude, there *are* rules... ever tried to get into a nightclub nude, wearing the wrong sweaters, being Turkish, black, old, young... I take your point about clubs/clubbing, but the overwhelming # of clubs are some of the most repressive places around. Your behaviour is under constant surveillance, and if you don't behave as you should, you'll be bum-rushed outta there.<BR/><BR/>There are explicit rules; there are also tacit norms. Dance music and the cultures that it's a part of are always expressed through these. Richie Hawtin could start dropping the odd waltz into his sets, but he's unlikely to... Sven Vath could play Diamanda Galas or Mayhem to the punters at Cocoon, but if he did it every week, how long would Cocoon stay open?<BR/><BR/>Third thing: I don't go out clubbing much anymore, but I listen to techno everyday, for hours, usually while I'm doing research and also when I walk (for reflection and exercise) and also at the gym. This is my listening environment, no less legitimate and no less shaping. I wouldn't say that there's a proper space of techno or a proper use of techno. <BR/><BR/>I'd also say that techno is very commonly made by a geeks who prefers staying at home in their studios to socialising with 'people' – many of them prefer the company of their pets and machines.<BR/><BR/>In any case, most people prefer dancing to R&B, at least if every house party I've ever been to is an indication. Timbaland/Timberlake/Madonna is the most popular. Mos people are alienated by music without vocals that has no hooks and/or a melody they've never heard before. The power of identification/recognition is massive in music. A lot of people only like to hear something they've heard before, and that they can sing along to.<BR/><BR/>Techno is a pretty minor music in most places in the world. A Dutch example: Joris Voorn comes to Melbourne and plays a big pub; Tiesto packs out the tennis centre.<BR/><BR/>...but yeah, you're right, maybe a lot of it comes back to sex? I mean, would the Panoramabar exist without Berghain? And would Berghain exist without gay men wanting to fuck each other? I'm not 100% sure...<BR/><BR/>...any thoughts?PChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11828854682227101864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-27616564750193269172008-06-26T14:58:00.000+10:002008-06-26T14:58:00.000+10:00Great feature...Personally I don't have any partic...Great feature...<BR/><BR/>Personally I don't have any particular genre agenda with respect to dance music criticism.<BR/><BR/>But I do have a structural agenda which I think is relevant to this debate.<BR/><BR/>Dance music exists for people to enjoy dancing to. There are lots of ways to enjoy dancing - there's a sexual one where the music taps into those sorts of feelings, and the social environment is treated as a place of sexual opportunity. Or there's a social one where the joy comes from the observation and interaction with other people. There's a creative, visual mode which is about constructing a fabulous identity for yourself and expressing it through clothing and dance. All of these things can and do make nightclubs and dance music great, but in different ways.<BR/><BR/>However critics nearly always tend to prioritise one mode over all these and that's the introspective intellectual mode - getting 'lost in music' going to a 'higher place' or 'on a journey'. <BR/><BR/>Techno isn't and wasn't just about music and it's certainly never been just about getting lost inside your own head. It's about dancing and nightclubs, and that involves fashion and sex and above all else, people. <BR/><BR/>So lets not peddle this horrible, boring, un-fun idea that techno is <A HREF="http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php/The_Internet_Is_Serious_Business" REL="nofollow">serious business</A>. There aren't rules and it's not okay to tell people that they musn't dress up the way they want to or that they musn't be from a certain place or that they have to interpret the music the way you tell them to. If people had done all that back in the 1980s we wouldn't HAVE the techno that we're all debating about in the first place.<BR/><BR/>It's pretty well documented that Derrick May started out playing European electronic music at preppie parties that considered new wave and italo-disco to be more 'sophisticated' than US R&B and everyone's probably seen the clothes in those youtube clips of Sharevari etc. <BR/><BR/>I'm dead certain that the 80s media influenced the development of techno because that's where the idea that Coogie sweaters and European music were 'sophisticated' came from. I think I'm right in saying that Share Vari was the name of a clothing store in Detroit... In other words this all started with fashion, with influences from overseas and with people 'getting it wrong'.<BR/> <BR/>So we can all acknowledge that Detroit artists have made a huge and lasting impact on music and have created works of great art. But you'd be doing them and the processes that influenced them a disservice if you use their example as a way to constrain, stultify and tone down the free expression of creativity in every form that's valid in nightclubs. 'Your' definition can't be forced on other people and nobody can 'own' techno no matter how loud or cogently they argue about it online...Jacobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16703651393173900609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-20303546762819375532008-06-25T15:56:00.000+10:002008-06-25T15:56:00.000+10:00"I am a massive fan of Detroit techno, no doubt, b..."I am a massive fan of Detroit techno, no doubt, but I don't stick strictly to it, but when listening to ANY music, I want to hear human soul, feeling and emotion. I actually want to connect to the music, you don't? What you said there is a ridiculous statement."<BR/><BR/>I didn't say I didn't want to connect with the music, or that I didn't want it to have feeling or emotion. What I don't want it to have is <I>human</I> feelig or emotion - which is what I take "soul" to mean here. Why use radical new tools to go back to where we allready have been for so long? The great thing about coming into the early, detroit-ignorant techno scene for me was exactly the way it went consequently into the unknown, inhuman and artificial! <BR/><BR/>If I want to hear music filled with the human soul, I'll listen to jazz or folk, which are much better at it than any kind of techno will ever be.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-18672416485933749882008-06-25T14:17:00.000+10:002008-06-25T14:17:00.000+10:00sorry, i should add - i'll make some more substant...sorry, i should add - i'll make some more substantial comments and replies later. flat out with work at the moment. but for the most, i've found this discussion very interesting. definitely discovered a few things...chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17030219185948353658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-78297300179367082452008-06-25T14:16:00.000+10:002008-06-25T14:16:00.000+10:00is everyone able to comment? i've had a report may...is everyone able to comment? i've had a report maybe the comments arent working properly. if so, please send us an email: mnmlssg@gmail.com<BR/><BR/>we are going to keep it free for people to post anonymously, but we'd prefer it if you did identify yourself, as i've lost track of how many different anonymous voices there are. and if you are going to comment, please make it (vaguely) constructive. the whole point of this is for it to be a discussion. if you think we are completely wrong or misguided, at least tell us why...chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17030219185948353658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-15064841492884741382008-06-25T14:10:00.000+10:002008-06-25T14:10:00.000+10:00@CZ... I mean no offense – I wasn't being sarcasti...@CZ... I mean no offense – I wasn't being sarcastic, and I'm not confused. I can give you short, simple, and durable definitions of what *I* think techno is. Another one on a broader, related concept... <BR/><BR/>Electronic music: music that is primarily made/generated using electronic equipment. <BR/><BR/>They're definitions that anyone can hear, not just some kind of 'you just know it when you feel it, trust me' kinds of things. <BR/><BR/>Or/so: what is techno if not the straight bass drum (doof doof doof), in modulating patterns built in 4/4, on drum machines and computers? Of course, techno is not exhausted by this definition and we then have to talk more subjectively about the stances and aesthetics of the arrangements, but can you remove more than one of these elements and still have something that sounds like techno, eg:<BR/><BR/>- is there a techno track that is not made with electronic equipment?<BR/><BR/>- is there a techno track that does not use a drum machine (or a computer simulating one) to generate its beat/structure?<BR/><BR/>Or, as a counter-proposition: what is techno for you, from a structural point of view? The fact that you say *I'm* confused makes me feel/think that you've got some clarity to lay on us. Please give us your definition so we can all examine the claim. Or is techno just a 'feeling', a secret to be grasped by the anointed/initiated, or something arbitrarily defined by groups of fans whose privilege comes from an association to a style of techno that they consider orthodox?<BR/><BR/>Or we could do it 'case by case', in which case, please give me some examples of tracks which are (not) techno with a descriptive example that explains why they can or can't be allowed to shelter beneath the umbrella definition...PChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11828854682227101864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-70065814139008298842008-06-25T13:24:00.000+10:002008-06-25T13:24:00.000+10:00CZ, every genre has rules, or if we want to put it...CZ, every genre has rules, or if we want to put it slightly less dogmatically, governing conventions. can they be discarded occasionally? sure, and often are to positive effect. but those are all pretty solid criteria for what makes much techno, at the very least, not something else. and i'm pretty sure PC is talking about techno as a sort of "umbrella" genre that encompasses others, though i realize that pipecock's view would seem to be the opposite -- that techno is one among many electronic-music genres that (to his mind) has unjustifiably been saddled with the responsibility for encompassing the others -- hence his preference to call minimal (minimal house, minimal techno, whatever) trace. that's how i parse it, anyway.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-43313857074304939282008-06-25T12:17:00.000+10:002008-06-25T12:17:00.000+10:00@PC - are you being sarcastic with this line of de...@PC - <BR/>are you being sarcastic with this line of definition: "But if you make a track on a drum machine (lets just say a 909) in 4/4 between 120-140bpm, with a kick drum on every beat (ie 'doof doof doof')... this already sounds a lot like techno.... in fact, this is arguably the 'essential convention'." ?<BR/><BR/>if serious, man, you have absolutely NO IDEA what techno really is, and your definition is even more limiting than pipecock's, and it would explain why you're so confused.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-72507704768721465482008-06-25T11:19:00.000+10:002008-06-25T11:19:00.000+10:00"when listening to ANY music, I want to hear human..."when listening to ANY music, I want to hear human soul, feeling and emotion. I actually want to connect to the music, you don't? What you said there is a ridiculous statement."<BR/><BR/>Not ridiculous at all, Kenny. YOU want to hear soul, but soul has hardly been the utmost in all electronic music. Rising High's Caspar Pound said in 1991, to i-D magazine, "The best thing about hardcore is all the soul’s been taken out. We’ve had 200 years of the human element in music and it’s about time for a change." Whether you care for it or not, there was a deliberate movement to strip the soul from the music.<BR/><BR/>Even Kodwo Eshun talks about "the artificiality that all humans crave." He also likes a lot of music that would be called "soulful"; I don't think that has to be a contradiction. That's part of the beauty of techno; that it can contain these kind of contradictions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-16822278388881180292008-06-25T11:04:00.000+10:002008-06-25T11:04:00.000+10:00"If we have to get into the soul thing, I would sa..."If we have to get into the soul thing, I would say that techno is exactly about extracting soul from music, the less soul the better, which is also why detroit techno is a REGRESSIVE form of techno IMO."<BR/><BR/>I am a massive fan of Detroit techno, no doubt, but I don't stick strictly to it, but when listening to ANY music, I want to hear human soul, feeling and emotion. I actually want to connect to the music, you don't? What you said there is a ridiculous statement.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-38551100793635005702008-06-25T08:46:00.000+10:002008-06-25T08:46:00.000+10:00@gmos: "“The word ‘techno’ was something that Juan...@gmos: "“The word ‘techno’ was something that Juan Atkins thought out aloud……"<BR/><BR/>Yes, and where might he have pulled such a word? From nowhere? Out of a hat? Or because he was reading Alvin Toffler and listening to techno-pop at the time, and was influenced by it?<BR/><BR/>@ X: "Jusr cus something electonic or has synths doesnt mean its techno"<BR/><BR/>Sure, there are other structural 'rules', too. Like, if the rhythms were 3/4, and the pattern cycled at 180 bpm, it probably wouldn't be techno. And or if it were 4/4 and 90-110bpm... not techno to most ears, probably early hip-hop or some kinds of electro.<BR/><BR/>But if you make a track on a drum machine (lets just say a 909) in 4/4 between 120-140bpm, with a kick drum on every beat (ie 'doof doof doof')... this already sounds a lot like techno.... in fact, this is arguably the 'essential convention'.<BR/><BR/>If you then fill the other rhythmic parts surrounding the kick with snares, hats etc from the 909... that complement and build on the groove made from the 'doof doof doof'...wow, this is starting to sound *a lot* like techno...(NB if you're good at programming the beats, you can even make these kinds of patterns funky, even if you're not black/from Detroit... this is usually called 'house music'). <BR/><BR/>But you're here to make techno. So you don't make it swing *too much*. Leave the beats a bit stiff, and now, add a synth... but instead of playing an emotive 'ditty' ('cos this might start to sound a bit like trance), you use the synth to add mood and atmosphere, just drones, stabs, and washes (maybe you modulate the sound by tweaking the tone pots or something). Okay... now just add some reverb here and there... my gosh, this sounds a lot like techno.<BR/><BR/>Also to X-101: funk + electronics = many, many, many different things, but probably most people insisting on a narrow definition would sooner identify this with g-funk, some kinds of hip-hop and R&B (Timbaland is funk + electronics) and house than they would with techno... funk would not be funk if it weren't funky – techno can still be techno. Whether that 'funkless' techno is good or not is just between you and your aesthetic prejudices.<BR/><BR/>Also (as a general thing) to the Detroit fans commenting: let's just say I'm 18 years old and I'm from France. I grow up listening to a lot of hip-hop, pop and rock, but on my eighteenth birthday I go to a club and hear a DJ playing these crazy, mind-bending, incessant grooves made with electronic equipment. They never stop! They just keep hitting! Oh my god, what the fuck is this music? How the fuck do I make this music?!<BR/><BR/>I'm so excited by what I've hear that the next day I cop a crack of Ableton off a mate, and within six months I'm making tracks. I start downloading lots of different music, (lets just say) but I hear this guy called 'Gaiser' and I start biting his style ('cos I think it's funky)... two years later I've got my shit together and am playing out... then somebody tells me the style I play is techno... (I guess, I 'spose, I'd never thought about it). I roll with this definition, which seems right when I hear other records described as 'techno'. But a few months later, I tell someone my set is 'techno', and I'm then told I owe dues to Detroit, a place I only know about from listening to Eminem... how would I/should I feel? And is it my duty to then learn the 'orthodox history' and bring my style 'into line', or else risk being called imitative and inauthentic?PChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11828854682227101864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-62939538750760757862008-06-25T08:11:00.000+10:002008-06-25T08:11:00.000+10:00@low-tech reality: you need to lay the fuck off ma...@low-tech reality: you need to lay the fuck off man, go play your bunk ass washed out bullshit in a club full of rich coke heads.<BR/><BR/>Thank you low-tech. I think we all learnt something there. I especially like the way you tell me to 'back off' by using an empty threat.<BR/><BR/>It's great when somebody really bares their soul in a post: not only does it advance the debate in interesting directions, but it shows a level of good faith and respect to others. Good job!PChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11828854682227101864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-23698762901362452212008-06-25T07:03:00.000+10:002008-06-25T07:03:00.000+10:00"this may be true, though i am not so sure the nam..."this may be true, though i am not so sure the name was so ubiquitous for that style. "techno" was obviously already being used by YMO, Kraftwerk, Cybotron, and Techno Hop Records already by 1984, none of which defined their own musical style. "<BR/><BR/>Well, first of all, how much did the early detroit artists really define a clearly distinctive sound? To me, Atkins and May seem as far apart as Chris & Cosey and Ryuichi Sakamoto. When I hear Model 500s classics, I hear very forward thinking electro, and when I hear Mays greatest hits I hear a kind of abstract house music. They don't resemble each other that much.<BR/><BR/>But if we, for the sake of argument, accept that detroit defined its own musical style, then it still doesn't give them any ownership to the name. On the contrary, I'd say that the germans, by finding a brilliant, fitting umbrella name for a lot of different things that clearly were connected, made techno a big and powerful force to be reconed with, and with much greater potentials for further mutation than the insular, isolationist Detroit movement. <BR/><BR/>The early german techno scene was open and inclusive, kind of like when a lot of different strands of music were suddenly seen as a collective thing a hundred years ago and was called "jazz", or when something similar happened with "rock" in the fifties. The german techno scene even had room for Detroit when it discovered it, as with Tresor and Hard Wax. To say that Detroit techno = techno is a bit like saying ragtime = jazz. <BR/><BR/>" i hate to get into the "soul" debate since that seems to get people all irritated, but so much "techno" these days is soulless mechanical nonsense. that is NOT what techno is about based on its founding principles."<BR/><BR/>Wrong, it's what techno is not about based on <I>detroits</I> founding principles. If we have to get into the soul thing, <I>I</I> would say that techno is exactly about <I>extracting</I> soul from music, the less soul the better, which is also why detroit techno is a REGRESSIVE form of techno IMO.<BR/><BR/>"seeing people getting recognition as "techno" artists despite making music that hardly even resembles techno is very frustrating."<BR/><BR/>Indeed. That's exactly how I felt the first time I heard detroit techno.<BR/><BR/>"especially when there are still many people making great techno music all around the world, yet they get no love whatsoever partially because of the fact that they are competing for a name with cheeseball rave music. the fact that the name "techno" applies to such music inhibits techno"<BR/><BR/>On the contrary, that a genre is able to contain a lot of cheap crap is actually a sign that it's in good health - that it's big and open enough to have both a pop side and an experimental underground. I'm grateful for the existence of cheeseball rave and the fact that everything isn't as tasteful, dull and self-dignified as detroit techno. <BR/><BR/>"i have personally been on a mission to enlighten people to techno's origins and bloodlines so that they can see it for what it really is, not for what the dance media has made it out to be."<BR/><BR/>And I'm on a mission to enlighten people to techno's origins and bloodlines so that they can see it for what it really is, not for what the detroit purists has made it out to be.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-26525482302638452792008-06-25T04:32:00.000+10:002008-06-25T04:32:00.000+10:00following on from tom and chris's comments/analysi...following on from tom and chris's comments/analysis on the characterstics that define techno from detroit vs. rest of the world: <BR/><BR/>I happen to think that while, yes, detroit techno emerged as a cultural phenemenon that was based on regional and sociological influences that only existed in this time and place, the idea that only techno from detroit is inherently imbued with soul is a fallacy. sure, having grown up in an inner city may fire imaginations into searching for an outlet that exists in their own imagination but it cannot be the only defining factor that allows artists to create music that is soulful, beautiful and funky. there is something very special in the sounds that have emanated from detroit and inspire people who are exposed to believe that 'techno' is so much more than what has been fed to us by the press, major labels, radio stations, etc. it may have been true at the start but there have been too many artists that have and are producing funky, soulful techno in other places outside detroit. for me these artists include vince watson, steve rachmad, joris voorn, quince, kirk degiorgio, peel seamus, orlando voorn, and on....<BR/>surely not all of these artists have had to come from poor, meager beginning to be able to produce emotional music. I would also add that from all I have read over the years, both Derrick and Kevin didn't exactly get raised in the roughest section of Detroit either. <BR/>that said, I am a huge fan of Detroit techno and have been since I first heard UR's "Hi-Tech Jazz," my first real exposure to the power of Detroit Techno. And for me this song represents something that could only have come out of Detroit because of what UR/Made Mike represents in terms of the cultural connection of music and the environement is comes from. <BR/><BR/>I realize that my post comes off as contradictory to my own point but that shows my personal struggle with this 'myth' and what it represents to me as a believer in techno, detroit and beyond.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-238207044480097942008-06-25T04:22:00.000+10:002008-06-25T04:22:00.000+10:00@PC you need to lay the fuck off man, go play your...@PC you need to lay the fuck off man, go play your bunk ass washed out bullshit in a club full of rich coke heads.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-1155982324665602732008-06-25T00:26:00.000+10:002008-06-25T00:26:00.000+10:00"The use of present tense in the second quote is r..."The use of present tense in the second quote is really interesting ("Techno ... is made mostly by black people living inside the city of Detroit").<BR/><BR/>Pipecock, correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I'm reading this strongly suggests that for you "Techno = Detroit Techno.""<BR/><BR/>i am repeating myself from an earlier comment, but techno = music that remains connected to the style of music that originated in Detroit. there are other people making it all over the world, but still the majority of it comes from Detroit artists (including those who have since moved elsewhere). <BR/><BR/>"If so, what about techno that is "mostly" produced in other parts of the world? By people who are "mostly" not from Detroit and not African-American? Or is that not techno, but a weak watered down cash-in? (The language that you use in the third quote comes very close to suggesting that this is cultural theft ... )"<BR/><BR/>i feel as if a lot of "techno" these days is not purposely watered down by artists, moreso it is watered down by the artists only being influenced by a very small crop of music that was already watered down. and that continues, you see these guys listening to and playing music that is only from a very recent time period and that music has no history, and as such almost no connection to detroit even in theory much less sound. there are of course some cats from europe and elsewhere who despite not being favorite artists of mine at least legitimately are connected to the real meaning of techno (John Tejada springs to mind amongst others). but most of it is just so far removed due to a series of waves of dance music that increasingly took funk and "soul" out of techno to the point where you have to either be actively listening to Detroit music or be a techno historian to hear techno that is funky the way it is supposed to be. now that there seems to be a bit of a "revival" of detroit and chicago sounds in the mnml world, maybe that will change up a bit. <BR/><BR/>"For me, when I hear the word "techno" many places, artists and labels flash through my mind. Sure, Detroit is one of those places, but it's most certainly not the only one, nor the first one. I think about Cologne, Wolfgang Voigt and the Kompakt Boys. I think about Frankfurt, Roman Flugel and Klang. I think about Berlin, Berghain, Hardwax, Villalobos, Dettmann, Klock ..."<BR/><BR/>some of those things are legitimately connected to Detroit music in heritage and sound. Wolfgang Voigt, Hard Wax, some Klang, and even early Kompakt records are/were all part of the lineage of detroit music. <BR/><BR/>"Later on in your piece, however, you say that there are indeed non-Detroit artists who are producing Detroit Techno. I'd like to know what differentiates these artists from those who are cashing-in. Does one need to grow up in a cultural environment similar to Detroit? (Your piece strongly suggests that place/culture is hugely important.)"<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>"Or is it the sound which is important ... does one need to replicate the Detroit Techno sound, injecting the "soul" into the machine?"<BR/><BR/>i think there are many guys who try to just straight up take the Detroit sound, some of whom are successful (Arne Weinberg and Chymera come to mind) some of whom are not (i would rather not name names here). but there are plenty of people who make their own music and do it successfully with sounds that have almost nothing to do with Detroit. Pepe Bradock is obviously influenced by Detroit, but his sound is very distinctively his. Redshape is another. etc etc. <BR/><BR/>"To be completely honest, I actually feel a little uncomfortable with this. In a comment in response to Chris you said that there is no future without a past. But (again, if I'm reading you right) what comes through here is an insistence that artists continually look back, repeat, replicate, copy ..."<BR/><BR/>how does that come through? only if you insisnt on reading something into my comments that was not in there. house and techno both came up in cultures that put a high prioity on crate digging. each style mixed music from the 70's and 80's as well as the newest records made as "house" and "techno" records. never at any point was it strictly about playing records that all sound exactly alike. right now, so many people have lost that historic perspective that listening to techno sets becomes extremely boring. the artists and deejays should be constantly looking back, looking around, and looking forward. right now we have an excess of "looking around" it seems. <BR/><BR/>"But is this *really* giving respect to Detroit? It seems to me that attempting to constantly reproduce a sound/feeling runs "the risk of turning Techno into a puritanical museum piece" (to quote the everpresent Anonymous at 9:49pm). Doesn't this insistence on giving props and respect actually strangle creativity?"<BR/><BR/>replicating a sound can be boring, though it can also be useful (seems like everyone but me likes that Prosumer album) to help regain awareness of certain older sounds. but the feeling is the defining feature of the music, and there are just about an infinite number of ways to skin that cat. <BR/><BR/>techno gives you the basic tools necessary: electronics and soul. what is up to artists now is to come up with a personal sound, something that uses those very wide open "limitations" but is distinctive. techno is not unlike jazz, there are so many possible combinations of sounds and structures that it is probably impossible to exhaust them all in even a couple decades. but what i hear today is people taking a computer and making random bleeps and bloops and saying "ah yes, i too am a techno producer". and the results are pretty terrible.pipecockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11092825988675368839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-84818637193619494672008-06-24T23:00:00.000+10:002008-06-24T23:00:00.000+10:00Jusr cus something electonic or has synths doesnt ...Jusr cus something electonic or has synths doesnt mean its techno, dotn get me wrong i own plenty of tangerine dream, ymo etc etc pipecock made a very important statement which you all seemed to have missed, black funk + white electronics = techno you remove either that means its not techno anymore its trance or some shit, most new minimal records are sounding more and more liek trance, and as for the parties, its all starting to look like ibiza in 1997 with sasha at the decks(along with 100 hangers on in the booth)<BR/><BR/>Imo the real genesis was electro from 79-82 while most went more into rap other like juan and other dj's in detroit kept there sound more electonic based, with out the fusion of black american music and european music you would not of had techno <BR/><BR/>FUNK + ELECTRONICS = TECHNO<BR/><BR/>No detroit techno just techno, doesnt matter wher eyou are in the world you can make techno, you dont even have to be directly influnced by a dtown artist to make techno, just like rock band now days dont have be be directly influnced by blues, but theres certain elements you must keep true to.<BR/><BR/>You can say most new techno producers are influnced by say basic channel & richie hawtin ye? well both will be the first to tell them that they were mostly influnced by detroit techno.<BR/><BR/>I think the main myth thats not discussed here is artist from detroit only produce this soulful electronic music, this is true but most of the 2nd wave made some hard even sometimes ugly music yet they always kept it funky, go listen to those first minimal records by rob hood & jeff mills, they maybe hard, they maybe minimal but they still hard that tight funk sound between the drums and the bass, it has that certain swing to it thats lacking in other forms of dance music out there ie trance.<BR/><BR/>Im not sur ehow long you guys have been into techno but even during the big uk boom of the 90s, you had guys coming from an industrial background yet they all kept the funk in there music which kept it being techno not coil or whatever.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-23995597630886925472008-06-24T21:42:00.000+10:002008-06-24T21:42:00.000+10:00@ gmos: yeah, lazy on my behalf. I'm just getting ...@ gmos: yeah, lazy on my behalf. I'm just getting tired of commenting is all, and I want other people to have the floor. 'I grow hoarse', if you will.<BR/><BR/>If you've been reading my posts or my many extensive comments, you'd probably say (maybe) that this is not my debating style. <BR/><BR/>I've said all I want to; I want other people to talk. Your sentiments and voice in this is interesting – I'd rather hear what you and others have to say.PChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11828854682227101864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7220957931635097123.post-70652620643906958452008-06-24T20:44:00.000+10:002008-06-24T20:44:00.000+10:00@ PC, I have to take issue with your debating styl...@ PC, I have to take issue with your debating style, quoting pipecock and stating, "I think there is some really, really dodgy stuff being said here, and it appears to be more like the deeper sentiment behind the mask", yet you don't actually say what your problem is, making it difficult for the accused to defend from vague implied accusations.<BR/><BR/>I'm wondering if you have a problem with the assertion that soulful and funky elements don't have the same place in European music culture as in the US? Are you thinking this is somehow racist? Well, I'm European and to me this is patently obvious, I don't see this as opinion but as cultural history, it's just how things developed over time.<BR/><BR/>Maybe I misinterpreted your point but that only illustrates why you shouldn't make vague accusations.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com